Nepotism in pilot selection

[menekse]

There are a lot of rumours in different topics that some people are getting hired cause of good connections or even bribery. My experience was with an airline operating from my hometown. I was quite happy with my present job but also a bit homesick. After they didn’t respond to my email I went to their offices. They asked me to have a Type Rating and I said I can do that. Then they asked me for hours in type. The thing was that I knew some guys that they were flying for them and it was their first job. I had more than 1000 hours on jets that time. But I can’t directly blame them as they never published a job opening with specific requirements.
I was reading the AirBaltic topic https://www.pprune.org/interviews-jobs-sponsorship/650102-airbaltic-4.html?ispreloading=1
and seems that they found a smoking gun, people that got hired even though they were not meeting the entry requirements.
I invite everyone to share similar experiences without spamming other topics.
Even make a list with airlines with shady practices so we will avoid wasting time.

[KongFlyer]

How is hiring someone with less than advertised requirements nepotism? Unless you can prove that the reason someone, without company required hours, got a job because of their relation to someone inside the company you don't have a smoking gun. A company can hire whoever they want, and if they cannot find enough candidates with advertised mins, it is entirely their prerogative to hire the next best thing. In fact you should be happy to see it is possible to find companies that are flexible in their hiring processes. You having hours doesnt entitle you to anything other than applying for said jobs - life is not fair.
I would rather focus my attention on the people buying their way into the industry with paid line training and creating an unfair advantage for themselves. Those guys are a much bigger threat to you.

[menekse]

How is hiring someone with less than advertised requirements nepotism? Unless you can prove that the reason someone, without company required hours, got a job because of their relation to someone inside the company you don't have a smoking gun. A company can hire whoever they want, and if they cannot find enough candidates with advertised mins, it is entirely their prerogative to hire the next best thing. In fact you should be happy to see it is possible to find companies that are flexible in their hiring processes. You having hours doesnt entitle you to anything other than applying for said jobs - life is not fair.
I would rather focus my attention on the people buying their way into the industry with paid line training and creating an unfair advantage for themselves. Those guys are a much bigger threat to you.
So you are saying that after the pandemic airlines in EU have hard time finding qualified pilots? Most of airlines ceased hiring since late 19, lots of experienced pilots lost their jobs especially in China and the war in Ukraine made it worse.
I say that there is no way that airlines are forced to hire below the requirements cause of pilot shortage, that’s a joke

[ilvee]

Have you thought about the fact that maybe the personality and so called ”soft skills” may also play a role in the selection? Thousand hours is nothing if interpersonal skills are non existent. It can also play a role if the application is unsufficient or unprofessional.
I would’nt advice only blaming others, but neither I’m saying there isn’t some sketchy employment types and paid line training practices in place, which in my opinion are just unacceptable. But those kinds of practices will go on as long as someone desperate and in my opinion stupid enough to stoop to that level.

[Contact Approach]

So you are saying that after the pandemic airlines in EU have hard time finding qualified pilots? Most of airlines ceased hiring since late 19, lots of experienced pilots lost their jobs especially in China and the war in Ukraine made it worse.
I say that there is no way that airlines are forced to hire below the requirements cause of pilot shortage, that’s a joke

Im afraid you are actually incorrect, there is indeed a shortage and it’s only getting worse!

[menekse]

Have you thought about the fact that maybe the personality and so called ”soft skills” may also play a role in the selection? Thousand hours is nothing if interpersonal skills are non existent. It can also play a role if the application is unsufficient or unprofessional.
I would’nt advice only blaming others, but neither I’m saying there isn’t some sketchy employment types and paid line training practices in place, which in my opinion are just unacceptable. But those kinds of practices will go on as long as someone desperate and in my opinion stupid enough to stoop to that level.
Let’s take an example
Easyjet is looking for F/O, 1000 hours total, 500 hours in aircrafts above 10 tons.
If a guy has hours only in a 5 tones Piper Cheyenne, do you think that has any chance to be called for an assessment by Easyjet?

[menekse]

Im afraid you are actually incorrect, there is indeed a shortage and it’s only getting worse!
In which corner of the world? Cause in EU salaries for pilots are still sh*t

[VariablePitchP]

Im afraid you are actually incorrect, there is indeed a shortage and it’s only getting worse!

In the US. There is not, and never has been, a pilot shortage in the EU, for example.

[Brexoff]

Not sure why it’s a surprise it happens in every industry. There’s a saying “It’s not what you know it’s who you know”

I remember a ex flight school pal who went through the pilot apprentice at a well know holiday airline, he did a stint with the pilot recruiters, one afternoon a senior management pilot came in and asked to see a list of people who’d applied for jobs.

He highlighted 5/6 names and said “These WILL be called for an assessment” They were all highly experienced captains he knew from a stint working in the desert.

Were they all qualified ? Yes,
Would they have been invited anyway? Probably

Its the way the world works

[Uplinker]

In which corner of the world? Cause in EU salaries for pilots are still sh*t
my bold

Hmmm.......,

a) Perhaps your potential employers noticed your less-than-respectful attitude? (Most of us started on low salaries and worked our way up over many many years, and job changes).

and

b) If the remuneration in the EU is not what you want, and you are purely in it for the money; why not look elsewhere?

[lederhosen]

Like the old joke why is airline X like the holy trinity…..because the son sits at the right hand of the father. I worked for one company that explicitly forbade hiring relatives. But I don’t personally agree with absolute bans any more than I believe in nepotism.

[John_Mclane]

I am referring to male candidates and I would like to ask them: you are afraid of nepotism but the #femaleinaviation trend does not concern you, right? Have you ever thought that some airlines give priority to women, not because they are more competent, but because they have to follow the modern trends and occupy a certain number of positions with women? This automatically can leave you out of the process for a while and you can lose time.

[meleagertoo]

I think the OP displays a surprising level of naiivety in expressing surprise at acquaintances being hired, let alone that this somehow amounts to nepotism of all thngs.

Recruiting is a hugely time-consuming and tedious business, especially if you are looking to hire numerous people. The recruiter's job is to identify not necesarily the best, but those acceptable to the requirements and also to the company. Given the vast number of applications they will be deluged with the recruiter has to filter the wheat from the chaff, along with a goodly amount of dross before he even has a pool from which to pick the chosen ones. Chewing through say 45 to select 15 would take ages; all have been found suitable, but which to pick? If there are familiar faces in the pile of CVs who are a known quantity and suitably qualified it would be remiss of the recruiter not to fish these out and maybe reduce the pool-trawling exercise down to selecting just 10 candidates as 5 have effectively been self-selected. Everyone benefits, much time (thus money) is saved, the company gets people it knows will fit in and who are a known quantity thus reducing traiing risks. As long as it asn't overdone and an elite cadre develops it's fine,

I submit it's a far superior system to the way Easyjet - and others - used to do it, using pallid clipboard-weilding academics right out of the University of Essex with sociology and "human resources" degrees and zero life-knowlege lording it over career-served ex BA Captains and Military pilots - making them grovel on the floor doing lego bridge-building teamwork exercises, and crossing people off the list immediately if they were foolish enough to have turned up to the ritual humiliation day wearing a tie...(thus demonstrating an unsuitability of character for Easyjet, apparently!). Numerous absolutely top guys fell foul of that awful, horribly prejudiced system.

[menekse]

I think the OP displays a surprising level of naiivety in expressing surprise at acquaintances being hired, let alone that this somehow amounts to nepotism of all thngs.

Recruiting is a hugely time-consuming and tedious business, especially if you are looking to hire numerous people. The recruiter's job is to identify not necesarily the best, but those acceptable to the requirements and also to the company. Given the vast number of applications they will be deluged with the recruiter has to filter the wheat from the chaff, along with a goodly amount of dross before he even has a pool from which to pick the chosen ones. Chewing through say 45 to select 15 would take ages; all have been found suitable, but which to pick? If there are familiar faces in the pile of CVs who are a known quantity and suitably qualified it would be remiss of the recruiter not to fish these out and maybe reduce the pool-trawling exercise down to selecting just 10 candidates as 5 have effectively been self-selected. Everyone benefits, much time (thus money) is saved, the company gets people it knows will fit in and who are a known quantity thus reducing traiing risks. As long as it asn't overdone and an elite cadre develops it's fine,

I submit it's a far superior system to the way Easyjet - and others - used to do it, using pallid clipboard-weilding academics right out of the University of Essex with sociology and "human resources" degrees and zero life-knowlege lording it over career-served ex BA Captains and Military pilots - making them grovel on the floor doing lego bridge-building teamwork exercises, and crossing people off the list immediately if they were foolish enough to have turned up to the ritual humiliation day wearing a tie...(thus demonstrating an unsuitability of character for Easyjet, apparently!). Numerous absolutely top guys fell foul of that awful, horribly prejudiced system.
As I wrote in my first post, the trigger to start this topic were the posts in another thread regarding hirings of candidates who were not meeting specific entry requirements.
I have read in a lot of topics similar complains but not something that solid.
As you say, those who are acceptable to the requirements. What about the ones who are not and still are hired?
I think in this case is not enough to see a familiar faces in the CV
Regarding the interview exercises. After I filed my resignation to the Air Force, I was assigned for a few days to interview military pilot candidates. Plain and simple we were sweeping out the weirdos

[menekse]

my bold

Hmmm.......,

a) Perhaps your potential employers noticed your less-than-respectful attitude? (Most of us started on low salaries and worked our way up over many many years, and job changes).

and

b) If the remuneration in the EU is not what you want, and you are purely in it for the money; why not look elsewhere?
Why is it less than respectful to say that salaries for pilots in EU are low? In other words sh#t?

[BraceBrace]

But I can’t directly blame them as they never published a job opening with specific requirements.

You never saw a job opening. You never saw specific requirements. And all this because on the simple basis you have more flight hours, you "earn" the job more than the others?

Even more, it's not because you put out an add you are looking for recruits, all of a sudden a "law" is created you are not allowed to hire "less than that". It's their company, they decide, not you.

It is funny though to see how you write about "others" & "issues" (blame, weirdo's, ****, awful, prejudiced,...).

[menekse]

You never saw a job opening. You never saw specific requirements. And all this because on the simple basis you have more flight hours, you "earn" the job more than the others?

Even more, it's not because you put out an add you are looking for recruits, all of a sudden a "law" is created you are not allowed to hire "less than that". It's their company, they decide, not you.

It is funny though to see how you write about "others" & "issues" (blame, weirdo's, ****, awful, prejudiced,...).
You kept from my post a part to make a case.
I clearly said that they didn't have a formal job opening but they asked a Type Rating and hours on type while other people were hired only with piston hours
Logical assumption is that positions were reserved for ''friends''
If you have a different opinion you can share it
Sorry to shock you, at least for military and common sense companies interviews are mainly to block weirdos

[BraceBrace]

You kept from my post a part to make a case.
I clearly said that they didn't have a formal job opening but they asked a Type Rating and hours on type while other people were hired only with piston hours
Logical assumption is that positions were reserved for ''friends''
If you have a different opinion you can share it
Sorry to shock you, at least for military and common sense companies interviews are mainly to block weirdos

Sorry I didn't quote every typed line to make my case (guess everyone who writes here tries to make a case but anyway...). I'll make my point clearer.

HR and training departments are full of working people with schedules and "lives to live". They have much more stuff to do than inviting people for interviews. I would even say that for many of them, interviews are extra's that need to be scheduled into a schedule that is already pretty tight. Every candidate they ’invite’ will follow the same selection process, and the result is not a question of "the best", because that would mean they would have to pile up a list, then only take the first 4. A waste of time and money. Every selection is an evaluation that costs money, so once started, if the person fits the bill, he will be hired. If during the process it is deemed the person doesn't fit the bill, the selection is stopped. Sometimes things need to go very fast, sometimes things slow down suddenly...

If positions are vacant, it is normal for "insiders" to pass information quickly to people they know, especially in smaller companies. That these "known people" have an advantage is always the case when it comes to "timing", they are the first to know, the first to knock on the doors. They fit? They get in. They don't fit? They don't get in.

Now this all sounds very theoretical and nice, I'm aware of reality and the "odd-one-out" cases. But that happens, and I don't see anything against that practice. If in the end the person does a good job in his new function, the selection was good.

However, you like to make a point about "others" all the time. Why? Because they wouldn't make time for you? Why blame? Why ****? Why awfull? If all that is the case, tell me why would you even want to work for such a company, together with these people?

[skyguardian88]

Have you thought about the fact that maybe the personality and so called ”soft skills” may also play a role in the selection? Thousand hours is nothing if interpersonal skills are non existent. It can also play a role if the application is unsufficient or unprofessional.
I would’nt advice only blaming others, but neither I’m saying there isn’t some sketchy employment types and paid line training practices in place, which in my opinion are just unacceptable. But those kinds of practices will go on as long as someone desperate and in my opinion stupid enough to stoop to that level.
The same was saying a guy in airBaltic topic
There was a conversation about the pilots who were not filling the entry requirements and still got in
As a result just for the ab A220 fleet, there are 3 runway excursions, one AOG due a hard landing (93kt over the runway in AMS hitting the ground above 1200 fpm ) and an incident where an A220 started final descent before FAF and was flying at 600ft AGL in 6,5 NM before the runway threshold, over Brussels city in VMC

[enzino]

Can you prove that the above mentioned events involve the pilots in question?

Please note that I am no AB fan, quite the contrary as I've had my bad experience with them years ago.

[skyguardian88]

Can you prove that the above mentioned events involve the pilots in question?

Please note that I am no AB fan, quite the contrary as I've had my bad experience with them years ago.
How to prove it in a forum? By uploading documents with names on them? Law is strict regarding personal data.
Which years were you in AB?
You might remember in 2018-2019 the large number of Dutch pilots getting in for the A220 positions.
Almost all of them were AIS company jetstream, 31 first officers.
Jetstream 31 was not complying with the FMS, EFIS aircraft experience entry requirement for the A220 position
Still they got invited and got hired while modern jet pilots were failed.
That time the assessment was in an old, weary B737 classic sim, they could easily fail anyone

[ilvee]

The same was saying a guy in airBaltic topic
There was a conversation about the pilots who were not filling the entry requirements and still got in
As a result just for the ab A220 fleet, there are 3 runway excursions, one AOG due a hard landing (93kt over the runway in AMS hitting the ground above 1200 fpm ) and an incident where an A220 started final descent before FAF and was flying at 600ft AGL in 6,5 NM before the runway threshold, over Brussels city in VMC

Haha, I bet these pilots are the ones who have never been the best or brightest ones in the training either. I’ve got a friend at AB who had a partner in the assesment (B737SIM) who used the wrong foot in oei-situation, could not fly raw data ILS even when given multiple attempts and had well over 1000 hrs. I’m not saying that the experience does not matter, of course if you have 2000 hrs in type, you are more competent to fly the aircraft than freshly graduated pilot with less than 200hrs. But lets say that there is a flight school in which 100 from 3000-4000 applicants get chosen, a pilot with top attitude and work ethic might be much better first officer after type-rating course than someone from a commercial flight school where almost anyone can buy their pilot training from and then getting 1000 hrs from somewhere.

It differs so much from individual to individual, even though in most cases the experienced pilot is on the front foot. It is much easier to train a pilot with good personality to fly well than to try to change an unwanted personality of a experienced pilot.

[meleagertoo]

Why would anyone think it out of order for an airline to hire whomsoever they like regardless of any experience levels stated in an advert. It is, after all, just an advert not a legally binding contract. If they see someone they particularly like they're quite at liberty to hire them regardless of qualifications as long as the candidate meets statutary minimum experience/standards requirements (if any) before commencing line flying.

[menekse]

Why would anyone think it out of order for an airline to hire whomsoever they like regardless of any experience levels stated in an advert. It is, after all, just an advert not a legally binding contract. If they see someone they particularly like they're quite at liberty to hire them regardless of qualifications as long as the candidate meets statutary minimum experience/standards requirements (if any) before commencing line flying.
I will tell you why.
Some years ago I participated a wizz air interview. One of the requirements was to have 300 hours in the last 12 months.
I had them when I applied but till they call me time passed. When they checked my logbook at the interview day, my flight hours for the last 12 months were around 270 and they didn't let me continue to the next phase.
How on earth is someone invited for an assessment without meeting the entry requirements for other airlines?
Let's say airline X is advertising for hours in aircrafts above 50 tons.
Do you think they will invite pilots with hours on a Cessna Caravan?
Even if Cessna Caravan pilots who will apply are super skilled or whatsoever they will never have the chance to show their abilities to airline X.
How the recruiter will take the responsibility to invite 5 times more people to check if ''likes'' someones who don't have hours on aircrafts above 50 tons?

[snuspe]

So you are saying that after the pandemic airlines in EU have hard time finding qualified pilots? Most of airlines ceased hiring since late 19, lots of experienced pilots lost their jobs especially in China and the war in Ukraine made it worse.
I say that there is no way that airlines are forced to hire below the requirements cause of pilot shortage, that’s a joke

No it’s not. I am a prime example of it. My company advertised that they were looking for pilots with minimum 1000 hrs early last year.

A few months went back and the company realized they did not find enough people and basically called and ask about my availability in 3 weeks. The assessment was quick and I got the job. My backgrond was TT 130 hrs, type rated B737, 1hr (MPL).

This is not a ****ty company, quite a nice and well renowned one.

Other things to note, I am getting an email from Wizz about once per week asking me to book my assessment asap, Ryanair is starting a ”Pilot recruitment roadshow”, they do everything if there is a good business case for it, they would not if they did not need to. Then again, we are not even at 2019 levels yet.

[menekse]

No it’s not. I am a prime example of it. My company advertised that they were looking for pilots with minimum 1000 hrs early last year.

A few months went back and the company realized they did not find enough people and basically called and ask about my availability in 3 weeks. The assessment was quick and I got the job. My backgrond was TT 130 hrs, type rated B737, 1hr (MPL).

This is not a ****ty company, quite a nice and well renowned one.

Other things to note, I am getting an email from Wizz about once per week asking me to book my assessment asap, Ryanair is starting a ”Pilot recruitment roadshow”, they do everything if there is a good business case for it, they would not if they did not need to. Then again, we are not even at 2019 levels yet.
WHY ALL THESE LIES MAN?


28th Nov 2022, 18:03
#16 (https://www.pprune.org/11338824-post16.html) (permalink (https://www.pprune.org/interviews-jobs-sponsorship/648679-cityjet-simulator-assessment.html#post11338824))
snuspe (https://www.pprune.org/members/523262-snuspe)

Join Date: Nov 2022
Location: SE
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Also posting my experience from the CJ assessment. As said before, just about an hour of briefing with 2 other candidates, 1 captain and 1 f/o.

I was second in to do the sim, 737 fixed based sim, not very nice to fly for an assessment but does the job. I am 737 type rated with a few hundred hours on type and I’d say that was beneficial in the sim, especially the handling and setup part, the other guy will help you if you don’t have experience on type so nothing to worry about. Normal departure out of RWY16 LSZH, LNAV/VNAV available but manual thrust so you ask for climb thrust at 1000 AAL in this case.

After departure, asked about a holding and which entry I’d perform, did not have to do the holding but I explained thoroughly how I would do it. After that manuevering part as described above and some questions regarding pans ops, holding limits, procedural turn etc.

After that reposition to the ground to perform EFATO and procedure 2 DME KLO then left turn to ZUE VOR, quite simple. After that holding with LNAV, TDODAR, NITS and some questions of how I’d phrase questions regarding issues to the cabin.

After that flying a base leg to intercept ILS 16, flying approach to minimums then the published missed app. Right after that asked by the holding by the end of the missed approach and which entry again, did not have to do it again. After this session completed, all in all about 50 min in the sim for me, quite stressful in the sim but overall an alright environment, now waiting for an email whether successful or not.
snuspe is online now Report Post (https://www.pprune.org/report.php?p=11338824)

[menekse]

No it’s not. I am a prime example of it. My company advertised that they were looking for pilots with minimum 1000 hrs early last year.

A few months went back and the company realized they did not find enough people and basically called and ask about my availability in 3 weeks. The assessment was quick and I got the job. My backgrond was TT 130 hrs, type rated B737, 1hr (MPL).

This is not a ****ty company, quite a nice and well renowned one.

Other things to note, I am getting an email from Wizz about once per week asking me to book my assessment asap, Ryanair is starting a ”Pilot recruitment roadshow”, they do everything if there is a good business case for it, they would not if they did not need to. Then again, we are not even at 2019 levels yet.
Also posting my experience from the CJ assessment. As said before, just about an hour of briefing with 2 other candidates, 1 captain and 1 f/o.

I was second in to do the sim, 737 fixed based sim, not very nice to fly for an assessment but does the job. I am 737 type rated with a few hundred hours on type and I’d say that was beneficial in the sim, especially the handling and setup part, the other guy will help you if you don’t have experience on type so nothing to worry about. Normal departure out of RWY16 LSZH, LNAV/VNAV available but manual thrust so you ask for climb thrust at 1000 AAL in this case.

After departure, asked about a holding and which entry I’d perform, did not have to do the holding but I explained thoroughly how I would do it. After that manuevering part as described above and some questions regarding pans ops, holding limits, procedural turn etc.

After that reposition to the ground to perform EFATO and procedure 2 DME KLO then left turn to ZUE VOR, quite simple. After that holding with LNAV, TDODAR, NITS and some questions of how I’d phrase questions regarding issues to the cabin.

After that flying a base leg to intercept ILS 16, flying approach to minimums then the published missed app. Right after that asked by the holding by the end of the missed approach and which entry again, did not have to do it again. After this session completed, all in all about 50 min in the sim for me, quite stressful in the sim but overall an alright environment, now waiting for an email whether successful or not.

Who asked you to make this post?
We got you misinformation spy

[BraceBrace]

Who asked you to make this post?
We got you misinformation spy

Look, it's pretty clear selection processes create a lot of stress, and there are more failures than succes stories. Only one advice: never ever let the frustration get the better side of you. It will close pretty much every door you're knocking on.

As a trainer I can only say it doesn't make any difference if you have no type rating, 100 hours on type or 500 hours on type. I would even say: the "out-of-school" guy is the easiest because of everything you guys are doing here. He has 0 experience and he knows it. You guys are claiming you "deserve" the position more than any other guy... on what basis? The 500 hour guys are sometimes the worst because they've been in one single company and they are out there to show you what's it all about. In my book that's already a pretty bad start (not because I think so, it's just pure experience). There is no competition. There is the SOPs you need to learn, the procedures used within a company so a group of people can co-operate. First things first.

Give me any company, and I'll give you reports of stupidity. Be carefull when you start to blame companies or pilots like that. As a pilot you don't want to be blamed because you've been stupid. And believe me, you'll do stupidity too...

I only react because my company is hiring as well, and stories from friends of friends of friends hardly ever grasp the reality of what really happened. The reality is simple: the company needs a girl/guy that can do the job. But they will never ever need YOU specifically.

Buy a good mirror, a book on assesments, and look at yourself. So that when the day comes you get a shot, you stopped fingerpointing someone else.

[menekse]

Look, it's pretty clear selection processes create a lot of stress, and there are more failures than succes stories. Only one advice: never ever let the frustration get the better side of you. It will close pretty much every door you're knocking on.

As a trainer I can only say it doesn't make any difference if you have no type rating, 100 hours on type or 500 hours on type. I would even say: the "out-of-school" guy is the easiest because of everything you guys are doing here. He has 0 experience and he knows it. You guys are claiming you "deserve" the position more than any other guy... on what basis? The 500 hour guys are sometimes the worst because they've been in one single company and they are out there to show you what's it all about. In my book that's already a pretty bad start (not because I think so, it's just pure experience). There is no competition. There is the SOPs you need to learn, the procedures used within a company so a group of people can co-operate. First things first.

Give my any company, and I'll give you reports of stupidity. Be carefull when you start to blame companies like that. As a pilot you don't want to be blamed because you've been stupid. And believe me, you'll do stupidity too...

I'm not going to go into a discussion on specific airlines and "selection process" because they are free to handle these selections as they desire. There is a lot more involved than the things I read here. I only react because my company is hiring as well, and stories from friends of friends of friends hardly ever grasp the reality of what really happened. The reality is simple: the company needs a girl/guy that can do the job. They will never ever need YOU specifically.

So go buy a good mirror, a book on assesments, and look at yourself. So that when the day comes you get a shot, you stopped fingerpointing at someone else.
You jump into conclusions which are contrary with my posts. In my first post already I said that I am happy with my current job but sometimes homesick and that was the only reason I tried for a company in my hometown.
I am have experience in both military and civilian aviation and I can say that I have cooperated with a lot of people from different backgrounds.
The current topic is NOT about who fits in a specific airline but which airlines don’t follow their own rules. I wouldn’t trust an airline like that not even as a passenger.
I started this thread cause I see a lot of complaints in different topics, my goal was to make a list.
Opinions like who fits in general etc etc are irrelevant to this topic

[BraceBrace]

You jump into conclusions which are contrary with my posts. In my first post already I said that I am happy with my current job but sometimes homesick and that was the only reason I tried for a company in my hometown.
I am have experience in both military and civilian aviation and I can say that I have cooperated with a lot of people from different backgrounds.
The current topic is NOT about who fits in a specific airline but which airlines don’t follow their own rules

I will repeat. It's not because an airline puts out an add, there is a legal requirement from their part to LIMIT the selection process to those people. They are free to invite others as well. Is it so hard to accept the fact that they are not obliged to see you because they hired somebody else?

You talked about bribery. Not me. You talked about blame. Not me.

[menekse]

I will repeat. It's not because an airline puts out an add, there is a legal requirement from their part to LIMIT the selection process to those people. They are free to invite others as well. Is it so hard to accept the fact that they are not obliged to see you because they hired somebody else?

You talked about bribery. Not me. You talked about blame. Not me.
Why to repeat, I never argued regarding the legality.
English is not my native language, can we agree that entering requirements are a “rule”?
What about companies who don’t follow their rules? What’s the motivation to invite 5 times more people? To spend more time and money?
We see things completely different, I never applied for a job that I didn’t comply with the add. Do you think I will have any luck with TUI which asks for a 787 TR? I don’t have one. According to you, maybe they will hire me, I should apply then!
Have you ever tried applying without meeting the requirements?

[zen krempie]

Why to repeat, I never argued regarding the legality.
English is not my native language, can we agree that entering requirements are a “rule”?
What about companies who don’t follow their rules? What’s the motivation to invite 5 times more people? To spend more time and money?
We see things completely different, I never applied for a job that I didn’t comply with the add. Do you think I will have any luck with TUI which asks for a 787 TR? I don’t have one. According to you, maybe they will hire me, I should apply then!
Have you ever tried applying without meeting the requirements?
No way for this company to invite a candidate who don't meet the entry requirements
That stands for all northern European companies.
In southern Europe maybe, if you have an uncle in the company
For eastern Europe for sure if you know the channel to pass some cash. I am not saying that all companies in Eastern Europe are prone to bribery. My personal experience was for only one. When I graduated an Instructor proposed me to secure me a First Officer position in an eastern European company if I would give him money so he would arrange it. He told me that he wouldn't keep the money (at least all) for himself. It was cheaper than an official P2F program.
I didn't take the offer to say if he could really arrange with the company. I would say that he was speaking the truth cause other graduates from my school were hired in that specific company

[skyguardian88]

Who asked you to make this post?
We got you misinformation spy
We witnessed a desperate attempt to convince us that is common for airlines to invite and hire people who don't meet the entry requirements
Their stupidity makes it worse
@WaylanderShade (https://www.pprune.org/members/527201-waylandershade) from the airBaltic topic was the first. He had to change his location from Prague to US and went silent now

[skyguardian88]

Haha, I bet these pilots are the ones who have never been the best or brightest ones in the training either. I’ve got a friend at AB who had a partner in the assesment (B737SIM) who used the wrong foot in oei-situation, could not fly raw data ILS even when given multiple attempts and had well over 1000 hrs. I’m not saying that the experience does not matter, of course if you have 2000 hrs in type, you are more competent to fly the aircraft than freshly graduated pilot with less than 200hrs. But lets say that there is a flight school in which 100 from 3000-4000 applicants get chosen, a pilot with top attitude and work ethic might be much better first officer after type-rating course than someone from a commercial flight school where almost anyone can buy their pilot training from and then getting 1000 hrs from somewhere.

It differs so much from individual to individual, even though in most cases the experienced pilot is on the front foot. It is much easier to train a pilot with good personality to fly well than to try to change an unwanted personality of a experienced pilot.
What did your 'friend' at airBaltic told you, did his sim partner pass?

[ilvee]

Obviously no.

[skyguardian88]

I am referring to male candidates and I would like to ask them: you are afraid of nepotism but the #femaleinaviation trend does not concern you, right? Have you ever thought that some airlines give priority to women, not because they are more competent, but because they have to follow the modern trends and occupy a certain number of positions with women? This automatically can leave you out of the process for a while and you can lose time.
Here you are
https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/653007-stop-choosing-useless-white-male-pilots-raf-told.html

[skyguardian88]

Obviously no.


Who is wrecking the A220's then?
5 serious pilot induced incidents are too many for a brand new fleet.

You have location Finland. Did you have your training at Patria in Pirkkala?
You may know the Finnish FI's from Patria who managed to skip the entry requirements and got hired
Did they tell you the story?
I really doubt if it is true. 1000+ hours on commercial aicraft means a lot of OPC's, how did he survive them?
Don't believe your friend, I wouldn't trust a guy who managed to skip certain requirements

You say
It is much easier to train a pilot with good personality to fly well than to try to change an unwanted personality of a experienced pilot.
Depends on how they got in
With what I have seen, pilots with the worst attitude are the ones who were favoured at the initial selection
From day one are sure that they will never be kicked out no matter what and of course they will be promoted to Captains regardless their performance
Happened to act as safety pilot for a couple of them, they were more concerned filming videos for instagram rather flying
One of them after his bad landings was always saying with a smile in his face next time will be a kiss landing
It's not something you say during your line training unless you are secured for some reason
By far the worst captain I have flown with was an ass licker. He sucked cocks to get jobs and he continued like that.
Bad pilot, bad person couldn't expect anything else from an lickspittle

[BraceBrace]

I am have experience in both military and civilian aviation and I can say that I have cooperated with a lot of people from different backgrounds.
The current topic is NOT about who fits in a specific airline but which airlines don’t follow their own rules.

Companies change rules all the time for the simple reason aviation is way to volatile to be able to plan trainings correctly. Everybody wants to do so, nobody really succeeds. From the moment somebody gets the "go" to increase the crew numbers until the end results, it takes a lot of time. The end result is an airline is usually either lacking crews, or overcrewed.

The final ultimate goal of the airline is to fly from A to B either for themselves or for a customer. Finding "the best pilot out there" is not an airline goal (although some might claim to, it usually doesn't end up well), airlines need somebody who can get that job done. Also, selection and training are two different worlds. It's fascinating to see how many people here tend to think passing a selection is a guarantee for training succes. It's also fascinating to see how people link selection to final "f^ck^ps" on the line, as if all doors are wide open and everything was clear from the moment they got hired. So somebody with a good selection, top ace pilot, will never end up on doing a 'f^ck^p"? Get real will you.

Stop thinking the selection process is about you, it's about the company that needs an "end product" in a few weeks and is looking for candidates that can fill that spot. Stop looking at the others, a simple add with 300hrs minimum requirements might be obsolote if the day after there is all of a sudden a new hired guy who calls in sick, or even worse, calls in to say he got hired in another company and a training slot needs to be filled.

Give your frustrations another way out, because in this topic there is honestly a lot of b$llsh$t. If you don't like the company, don't apply. And yes I have applied with less than minimum requirements, got even a job offer based on my cv for another job which I had to stay in for 3 years before they would give me a chance to transfer to the flightdeck. And I have witnessed people who have accepted such position and failed pilot selection eventually as well.

Give it your best shot, simply show you are a guy that can get the job done and be patient. Don't go out to show how damn good you are, don't think you're better than the others.

[zen krempie]

Why is it less than respectful to say that salaries for pilots in EU are low? In other words sh#t?
There are a lot of pilots in Europe willing to take a P2F program or even bribe.
That ''offer'' I had from this instructor was to give 10k cash, plus an overpriced TR, to have a salary of around 1200 euros
Obviously some pilots were taking that offer and I guess it wasn't the only airline with this practice
Why airlines to pay high salaries if so many pilots in Europe are willing to reach that point...

[ilvee]

No I did not, neither did my friend who is now at ab. He was in the recruitment process pre covid when they were hiring Q400 fo:s and what I can tell about the guy in the sim, he was from our neighbouring country where maybe not all opc`s are that strict. I do not know anybody who has got chosen to an airline with less hours than has been required, I was just telling my opinion with an example from real life, at least to some extent. And as I said, most of the experienced pilots are of course more competent than fresh graduates, but there are rare exceptions. For example if you go through a selection process to your training, where 2 percent of the applicants get chosen, it might be that you have some qualities that are seeked from the airlines also.

[menekse]

There are a lot of pilots in Europe willing to take a P2F program or even bribe.
That ''offer'' I had from this instructor was to give 10k cash, plus an overpriced TR, to have a salary of around 1200 euros
Obviously some pilots were taking that offer and I guess it wasn't the only airline with this practice
Why airlines to pay high salaries if so many pilots in Europe are willing to reach that point...
Thank you for your contribution, the topic is about these cases.
Could you share the name of the company that was accepting bribes?

[skyguardian88]

No I did not, neither did my friend who is now at ab. He was in the recruitment process pre covid when they were hiring Q400 fo:s and what I can tell about the guy in the sim, he was from our neighbouring country where maybe not all opc`s are that strict. I do not know anybody who has got chosen to an airline with less hours than has been required, I was just telling my opinion with an example from real life, at least to some extent. And as I said, most of the experienced pilots are of course more competent than fresh graduates, but there are rare exceptions. For example if you go through a selection process to your training, where 2 percent of the applicants get chosen, it might be that you have some qualities that are seeked from the airlines also.
Since you bothered telling your opinion with an example from real life, why don't you ask your friend in AB about the your fellow Finnish pilots who skipped the entry requirements and joined AB last year with previous experience in 4 seats planes.
That would be much more relevant with this thread rather the story of a failed candidate you posted

[OKSUP]

The same was saying a guy in airBaltic topic
There was a conversation about the pilots who were not filling the entry requirements and still got in
As a result just for the ab A220 fleet, there are 3 runway excursions, one AOG due a hard landing (93kt over the runway in AMS hitting the ground above 1200 fpm ) and an incident where an A220 started final descent before FAF and was flying at 600ft AGL in 6,5 NM before the runway threshold, over Brussels city in VMC

How can you be certain these incidents involved the FOs not meeting entry requirements? Do you work at AB? Were you part of the investigations?
Rwy excursions happen for many different reasons than just "pilots hired below published requirements". People make mistakes, all the time, regardless of their hours or previous experience. On the opposite, junior crews with little experience may display above average skills or attitude, even if they do not meet a published requirement.

I conducted my fair share of interviews in my previous career (not aviation related) and yes at times, I asked HR to send job offers to candidates who did not meet all the point of the job description. Not because they bribed me or because I knew the cousin or their godmother, but just because they showed a personality that would fit the team and make their onboarding a lot smoother and faster. A skill can be learned much faster than changing an attitude or a personality trait.

Bottom line is, hiring below a requirement that you publish on a job description is:
1) legal
2) doesn't necessarily mean there is nepotism or bribery. I'd even say these are extrem assumptions but ok...
3) as a hiring manager, you would be dumb to reject someone who displays a great attitude, just because they don't meet 100% of your published requirements. I'm of course not saying that you should disregard completely the requirements, they are here for a reason, which is to filter and give a direction to the applications you receive. But seeing the world as black or white, solely based on job requirements, would be dumb

[ilvee]

Agree.

[menekse]

How can you be certain these incidents involved the FOs not meeting entry requirements? Do you work at AB? Were you part of the investigations?
Rwy excursions happen for many different reasons than just "pilots hired below published requirements". People make mistakes, all the time, regardless of their hours or previous experience. On the opposite, junior crews with little experience may display above average skills or attitude, even if they do not meet a published requirement.

I conducted my fair share of interviews in my previous career (not aviation related) and yes at times, I asked HR to send job offers to candidates who did not meet all the point of the job description. Not because they bribed me or because I knew the cousin or their godmother, but just because they showed a personality that would fit the team and make their onboarding a lot smoother and faster. A skill can be learned much faster than changing an attitude or a personality trait.

Bottom line is, hiring below a requirement that you publish on a job description is:
1) legal
2) doesn't necessarily mean there is nepotism or bribery. I'd even say these are extrem assumptions but ok...
3) as a hiring manager, you would be dumb to reject someone who displays a great attitude, just because they don't meet 100% of your published requirements. I'm of course not saying that you should disregard completely the requirements, they are here for a reason, which is to filter and give a direction to the applications you receive. But seeing the world as black or white, solely based on job requirements, would be dumb

You didn’t quote me but I am the OP.
Happy to have in this topic a Czech guy ( you posted that you live and work in Prague) who works for airbaltic as your location is Riga.
Instead of general assumptions you can tell us how they called at the first place the Czech group of pilots who didn’t meet the entry requirements. I don’t have first hand knowledge but there are a lot of posts about it in airbaltic thread and it was one of the reasons to open this thread. You can give useful info as all this fuzz was about you guys.
Regarding your post
1.It’s true AB has quite a lot of pilot related incidents. Since are pilot related there must be something in selection or training or both.
2. At least what I found on google, AB lately had more than 300 pilot candidate’s interviews , why to bother invite the ones who didn’t meet the entry requirements? To waste time and money? They had a ton of CVs I guess, what is reasonable is to pick the ones who meet the requirements. You say they “showed personality” How is that, via the piles of CVs? According the posts at ab thread a whole group of Czechs who didn’t meet the requirements passed, isn’t suspicious?
Regarding the legality, as far as I know, ab is a state company, Latvian tax payers fund it, and no monkey business should happen.
In my last days in the Air Force was interviewing pilot candidates, if I was not following the rules I would be court martialed cause I was working for the state. Laws are varies from country to country but braking regulations in public sector can lead you to serious legal trouble. Anyway I don’t know the exact status of ab.
Of course all these are theories, you can give us a more comprehensive answer. And saying “showed personality” isn’t convincing at least when you apply for a job in a different country supposedly you don’t know the hiring team in person

[BraceBrace]

In my last days in the Air Force was interviewing pilot candidates, if I was not following the rules I would be court martialed cause I was working for the state. Laws are varies from country to country but braking regulations in public sector can lead you to serious legal trouble.

Commercial aviation is not the Air Force. No commercial pilot ever declared an "oath of enlistment". No commercial pilot "salutes" his chief pilots or any higher ranked person. You're making completely wrong comparisons. It's a simple negociated contract between an employer and an employee to do a job.

[OKSUP]

You didn’t quote me but I am the OP.
Happy to have in this topic a Czech guy ( you posted that you live and work in Prague) who works for airbaltic as your location is Riga.
Instead of general assumptions you can tell us how they called at the first place the Czech group of pilots who didn’t meet the entry requirements. I don’t have first hand knowledge but there are a lot of posts about it in airbaltic thread and it was one of the reasons to open this thread. You can give useful info as all this fuzz was about you guys.
Regarding your post
1.It’s true AB has quite a lot of pilot related incidents. Since are pilot related there must be something in selection or training or both.
2. At least what I found on google, AB lately had more than 300 pilot candidate’s interviews , why to bother invite the ones who didn’t meet the entry requirements? To waste time and money? They had a ton of CVs I guess, what is reasonable is to pick the ones who meet the requirements. You say they “showed personality” How is that, via the piles of CVs? According the posts at ab thread a whole group of Czechs who didn’t meet the requirements passed, isn’t suspicious?
Regarding the legality, as far as I know, ab is a state company, Latvian tax payers fund it, and no monkey business should happen.
In my last days in the Air Force was interviewing pilot candidates, if I was not following the rules I would be court martialed cause I was working for the state. Laws are varies from country to country but braking regulations in public sector can lead you to serious legal trouble. Anyway I don’t know the exact status of ab.
Of course all these are theories, you can give us a more comprehensive answer. And saying “showed personality” isn’t convincing at least when you apply for a job in a different country supposedly you don’t know the hiring team in person

Not all people living in Prague are Czechs. Including me.

Flying for AB does not give me insights into their HR and hiring policies. I just fly their planes, I don't hire pilots. I'm not going to make assumptions on something I don't know.

To my knowledge AB doesn't have more incidents than any other airline. Back to my question, do you have comparative data to support your claim? Were you involved in the investigations? If not, then you are just speculating.

The personality and attitude is something you assess during the interview of course, to see if the candidate will integrate well with your crews. If you want to be flexible on your requirements to allow meeting candidates with interesting profiles, it's up to you. Many employers are not strict on all published requirements for this exact reason. But you seem to see the world as black or white only (if I caricature, I would have guessed you come from the military without you telling us... )

Regarding your speculation that "a whole group of Czechs passed the assessment", I can only tell about my experience:
- I don't see many Czech crews in the crew briefing
- I didn't know anyone at AB when I applied
- I didn't get any shortcut, I met the requirements and had the same assessment as everyone else through my application (online test, then 2 days assessment in Riga with sim, technical interview, HR interview, psychology interview/psychometric tests, and finally management interview). There was no middle man or whatever complotist thing you mentioned in the other post...
- I certainly didn't bribe anyone ( lol, from all your assumptions, I have to admit this one made me laugh :ugh:) I can't even afford a TR, so Immagine a bribery...I also did not pay anything for my TR or LT. Just the regular bond as usual for many airlines.

I'm not sure this will satisfy your hunger for plots but please chill and stop seeing tricks everywhere. I got rejected by other airlines, with no responses, no feedback. I just forget about it and move on. Trust me life is easier like that :ok:

[menekse]

Not all people living in Prague are Czechs. Including me.

Flying for AB does not give me insights into their HR and hiring policies. I just fly their planes, I don't hire pilots. I'm not going to make assumptions on something I don't know.

To my knowledge AB doesn't have more incidents than any other airline. Back to my question, do you have comparative data to support your claim? Were you involved in the investigations? If not, then you are just speculating.

The personality and attitude is something you assess during the interview of course, to see if the candidate will integrate well with your crews. If you want to be flexible on your requirements to allow meeting candidates with interesting profiles, it's up to you. Many employers are not strict on all published requirements for this exact reason. But you seem to see the world as black or white only (if I caricature, I would have guessed you come from the military without you telling us... )

Regarding your speculation that "a whole group of Czechs passed the assessment", I can only tell about my experience:
- I don't see many Czech crews in the crew briefing
- I didn't know anyone at AB when I applied
- I didn't get any shortcut, I met the requirements and had the same assessment as everyone else through my application (online test, then 2 days assessment in Riga with sim, technical interview, HR interview, psychology interview/psychometric tests, and finally management interview). There was no middle man or whatever complotist thing you mentioned in the other post...
- I certainly didn't bribe anyone ( lol, from all your assumptions, I have to admit this one made me laugh :ugh:) I can't even afford a TR, so Immagine a bribery...I also did not pay anything for my TR or LT. Just the regular bond as usual for many airlines.

I'm not sure this will satisfy your hunger for plots but please chill and stop seeing tricks everywhere. I got rejected by other airlines, with no responses, no feedback. I just forget about it and move on. Trust me life is easier like that :ok:
My only knowledge about airbaltic comes from the relevant thread in this forum and some google search. Seems it’s the first case of smoking gun found that’s why I mentioned it here and the purpose of that thread is to make a list of companies who act differently from those that publish. I shared my experience from another company but in that case weren’t any written requirements, so no hard evidence of nepotism.
I highlighted the interesting part of your post.
For the recruiters to assess the personality and attitude, have to invite you first.
How to invite someone who doesn’t meet the requirements? Cause he has a nice photo in the CV? CVs are about certifications and experience. Under transparent procedures, you have what they ask, they call you, you don’t have, they take your CV off the piles and throw it to the recycle. Otherwise each company would have to call thousands off people in each job opening just to check if they have a nice personality.
btw in airbaltic thread were posts regarding people who were not invited cause didn’t meet entry requirements. Logical assumption is that there was something “special” about these candidates and I don’t think it was their personality which made the hiring team to take their CV out of the piles and invite them despite the fact they didn’t meet entry requirements
And lastly, at ab topic some posters say that Czech pilots who got hired were flying L410 which is not FMS, EFIS etc, as ab asks, can you confirm that?

[OKSUP]

My only knowledge about airbaltic comes from the relevant thread in this forum and some google search. Seems it’s the first case of smoking gun found that’s why I mentioned it here and the purpose of that thread is to make a list of companies who act differently from those that publish. I shared my experience from another company but in that case weren’t any written requirements, so no hard evidence of nepotism.
I highlighted the interesting part of your post.
For the recruiters to assess the personality and attitude, have to invite you first.
How to invite someone who doesn’t meet the requirements? Cause he has a nice photo in the CV? CVs are about certifications and experience. Under transparent procedures, you have what they ask, they call you, you don’t have, they take your CV off the piles and throw it to the recycle. Otherwise each company would have to call thousands off people in each job opening just to check if they have a nice personality.
btw in airbaltic thread were posts regarding people who were not invited cause didn’t meet entry requirements. Logical assumption is that there was something “special” about these candidates and I don’t think it was their personality which made the hiring team to take their CV out of the piles and invite them despite the fact they didn’t meet entry requirements
And lastly, at ab topic some posters say that Czech pilots who got hired were flying L410 which is not FMS, EFIS etc, as ab asks, can you confirm that?

Again you're asking me to confirm things I cannot know, so I'm not going to do that. I don't know these Czech pilots you are refering to. But I know a bit about the Let, having lived in CZ for a while. It's a CS-25 aircraft. Some are EFIS equiped (from factory or retrofitted) with autopilot and FMA. Especially the ones operated in commercial pax in Europe (and to anticipate your next question that I see coming Sherlock :hmm: , yes even Van Air has one Let with EFIS, FMA, FMS etcetc but retrofitted) True that the bush flying ones in Africa and Siberia probably aren't equiped with those. But I don't know more about those. The ones from Air Guyane though also have autopilot, EFIS and FMA, despite doing a bit of bush flying.
So my educated guess is that it can meet AB's requirements.

From the CV you can tick the boxes for the technical requirements, but you can also draw someone's profile. Like past experiences, outside of aviation, life experiences, studies, hobbies. Again, I'm no pilot recruiter so maybe it is different when hiring crews. But when I was recruiting, if I would get a CV with only qualifications matching my requirements, and no other information on the candidate regarding previous experience, hobbies and other non-job related info, I would put it last on my pile as I don't have enough information to assess if we will "click" with the candidate.
Bottom line is that you're not hiring a robot who ticks all your boxes or doesn't. You're hiring your future colleague with whom you'll have to work, with whom you'll have lunch breaks, with whom you'll spend a lot of time with. If you hire a person who ticks all the boxes, a genius in his field, but who's a total di*k with no affinities with the team, you set yourself up for failure.
But that's just my view on recruiting. Some companies may think otherwise and fair enough, it's up to them.

[batushka]

Not all people living in Prague are Czechs. Including me.

Flying for AB does not give me insights into their HR and hiring policies. I just fly their planes, I don't hire pilots. I'm not going to make assumptions on something I don't know.

To my knowledge AB doesn't have more incidents than any other airline. Back to my question, do you have comparative data to support your claim? Were you involved in the investigations? If not, then you are just speculating.

The personality and attitude is something you assess during the interview of course, to see if the candidate will integrate well with your crews. If you want to be flexible on your requirements to allow meeting candidates with interesting profiles, it's up to you. Many employers are not strict on all published requirements for this exact reason. But you seem to see the world as black or white only (if I caricature, I would have guessed you come from the military without you telling us... )

Regarding your speculation that "a whole group of Czechs passed the assessment", I can only tell about my experience:
- I don't see many Czech crews in the crew briefing
- I didn't know anyone at AB when I applied
- I didn't get any shortcut, I met the requirements and had the same assessment as everyone else through my application (online test, then 2 days assessment in Riga with sim, technical interview, HR interview, psychology interview/psychometric tests, and finally management interview). There was no middle man or whatever complotist thing you mentioned in the other post...
- I certainly didn't bribe anyone ( lol, from all your assumptions, I have to admit this one made me laugh :ugh:) I can't even afford a TR, so Immagine a bribery...I also did not pay anything for my TR or LT. Just the regular bond as usual for many airlines.

I'm not sure this will satisfy your hunger for plots but please chill and stop seeing tricks everywhere. I got rejected by other airlines, with no responses, no feedback. I just forget about it and move on. Trust me life is easier like that :ok:
Why laughing with the bribe assumption?
What is your opinion for the massive hiring of Czech VanAir pilots who were flying the LET410 before? It didn't cover the requirements of AB for EFIS/FMS experience.
Did they call them cause looked nice guys?
How did they figure it out, by reading their CVs?
If I was in any HR team I would be annoyed with the candidates who send without having the requirements, would be useless extra work for me. That's why I don't send if I don't meet the entry requirements.
A year ago, when AB opened positions were still a lot of experienced unemployed pilots due of covid and war in the Ukraine, I don't think adequate candidates were less than the positions offered

[menekse]

Commercial aviation is not the Air Force. No commercial pilot ever declared an "oath of enlistment". No commercial pilot "salutes" his chief pilots or any higher ranked person. You're making completely wrong comparisons. It's a simple negociated contract between an employer and an employee to do a job.
I am not talking about the legality but about the ethics. Ethics are the same everywhere the legality and bureaucracy differs.
Maybe in the above case there is some legal issues since is a state company and receives tax money. Citizens pay for the brand new A220 and every second month or so they have a broken one due to pilot mistakes. If pilot selection is not in accordance with written regulations then it is a public employee misconduct which can have legal consequences. Said before that what I know for this company comes from a his forum, can’t be sure. It’s a forum not a court room

[OKSUP]

Why laughing with the bribe assumption?
What is your opinion for the massive hiring of Czech VanAir pilots who were flying the LET410 before? It didn't cover the requirements of AB for EFIS/FMS experience. Guys, sorry to be rude but you're gonna have to learn how to read. I've already written that I haven't seen this "massive hiring of Czech guys" you keep talking about. I can't have an opinion about it as I've never seen it :ugh: Actually, I don't recall meeting a single Czech FO yet in the briefing room...I wish, cos I like Czech people, I spent my fair share of time in Praha :ok:

Also written just above, Van Air has Lets with EFIS, AP etcetc, so this experience can meet AB's requirements. Not sure why you keep claiming otherwise. Yes they have planes without EFIS in their fleet but that doesn't mean the pilots there don't get the experience on both. And your claim of "a middle man" at AB...lol Guys I know people from Van Air, it's a small acmi airline they don't even have a middle man for themselves! :)

I'm not defending AB here, I'm just stating what I see. And it's not what you are writing about. That's it, no more no less.
But I feel you guys are going to keep looking for something anyway, so enjoy. I'm done here

[menekse]

Why laughing with the bribe assumption?
What is your opinion for the massive hiring of Czech VanAir pilots who were flying the LET410 before? It didn't cover the requirements of AB for EFIS/FMS experience.
Did they call them cause looked nice guys?
How did they figure it out, by reading their CVs?
If I was in any HR team I would be annoyed with the candidates who send without having the requirements, would be useless extra work for me. That's why I don't send if I don't meet the entry requirements.
A year ago, when AB opened positions were still a lot of experienced unemployed pilots due of covid and war in the Ukraine, I don't think adequate candidates were less than the positions offered
That’s interesting.
If hired a number of pilots from a specific company and all of them were not filling the entry requirements then this indicates something organised

[menekse]

Again you're asking me to confirm things I cannot know, so I'm not going to do that. I don't know these Czech pilots you are refering to. But I know a bit about the Let, having lived in CZ for a while. It's a CS-25 aircraft. Some are EFIS equiped (from factory or retrofitted) with autopilot and FMA. Especially the ones operated in commercial pax in Europe (and to anticipate your next question that I see coming Sherlock :hmm: , yes even Van Air has one Let with EFIS, FMA, FMS etcetc but retrofitted) True that the bush flying ones in Africa and Siberia probably aren't equiped with those. But I don't know more about those. The ones from Air Guyane though also have autopilot, EFIS and FMA, despite doing a bit of bush flying.
So my educated guess is that it can meet AB's requirements.

From the CV you can tick the boxes for the technical requirements, but you can also draw someone's profile. Like past experiences, outside of aviation, life experiences, studies, hobbies. Again, I'm no pilot recruiter so maybe it is different when hiring crews. But when I was recruiting, if I would get a CV with only qualifications matching my requirements, and no other information on the candidate regarding previous experience, hobbies and other non-job related info, I would put it last on my pile as I don't have enough information to assess if we will "click" with the candidate.
Bottom line is that you're not hiring a robot who ticks all your boxes or doesn't. You're hiring your future colleague with whom you'll have to work, with whom you'll have lunch breaks, with whom you'll spend a lot of time with. If you hire a person who ticks all the boxes, a genius in his field, but who's a total di*k with no affinities with the team, you set yourself up for failure.
But that's just my view on recruiting. Some companies may think otherwise and fair enough, it's up to them.
No need to be a Sherlock these days.
In airbaltic thread someone posted a photo of OK-LAZ, VanAir L410
No EFIS and of course no FMS
You are free to upload photos with visible registration number, till then you are a misinformation poster
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1200x675/4_14afe075949591e0943b8c6703aeb1bafbe96e03_56714564ea039f52b 0adb58a96a238d6e8a8a263.jpg

[Luray]

A skill can be learned much faster than changing an attitude or a personality trait.

Minumum flight time requirements are set for safety reasons. You can have best attitude and constant smile on your face, but believe me from safety point of view without experience in airline flying you are still the same kid as the one with bad attitude. its like bodybuilding. If you have super duper motivation , you still can't compete with someone who's been lifting for years.
Even mediocre pilot with solid experience will be much safer than fresh cpl holder with the best knowledge of atpl's and airplane systems.
People at HR are kids on first time job accompanied by office pilots that couln't handle everyday flying. They think autopilot flies an airplane and in case it fails there is a captain to take over. According to them , FO is simply a rudiment required by outdated law. Why would they need to hire experienced FO that will ask for better conditions and salary when there is a kid from let410 that will lick their bottom and not complain for a few years just to be replaced by another expendabale kid after a couple of years.
Prove me wrong , but recent incident involving motivated instagram pilots almost crashing fully functional a220 in day VMC is my argument.

[zen krempie]

Again you're asking me to confirm things I cannot know, so I'm not going to do that. I don't know these Czech pilots you are refering to. But I know a bit about the Let, having lived in CZ for a while. It's a CS-25 aircraft. Some are EFIS equiped (from factory or retrofitted) with autopilot and FMA. Especially the ones operated in commercial pax in Europe (and to anticipate your next question that I see coming Sherlock :hmm: , yes even Van Air has one Let with EFIS, FMA, FMS etcetc but retrofitted) True that the bush flying ones in Africa and Siberia probably aren't equiped with those. But I don't know more about those. The ones from Air Guyane though also have autopilot, EFIS and FMA, despite doing a bit of bush flying.
So my educated guess is that it can meet AB's requirements.

From the CV you can tick the boxes for the technical requirements, but you can also draw someone's profile. Like past experiences, outside of aviation, life experiences, studies, hobbies. Again, I'm no pilot recruiter so maybe it is different when hiring crews. But when I was recruiting, if I would get a CV with only qualifications matching my requirements, and no other information on the candidate regarding previous experience, hobbies and other non-job related info, I would put it last on my pile as I don't have enough information to assess if we will "click" with the candidate.
Bottom line is that you're not hiring a robot who ticks all your boxes or doesn't. You're hiring your future colleague with whom you'll have to work, with whom you'll have lunch breaks, with whom you'll spend a lot of time with. If you hire a person who ticks all the boxes, a genius in his field, but who's a total di*k with no affinities with the team, you set yourself up for failure.
But that's just my view on recruiting. Some companies may think otherwise and fair enough, it's up to them.
LET 410 is CS-23 aircraft.
If you were flying it (I believe you actually did after all these faulty information you try to pass) and you don't know the airworthiness requirement category, you are a danger in the sky.
And furthermore you are discrediting the company that hired you

[OKSUP]

LET 410 is CS-23 aircraft.
If you were flying it (I believe you actually did after all these faulty information you try to pass) and you don't know the airworthiness requirement category, you are a danger in the sky.
And furthermore you are discrediting the company that hired you

Allright, before going all drama queen on being a danger in the sky, did you know a CS-23 can be operated under regulations of a CS-25? Which many CS-23 planes in pax operations are doing, Jet31, Let, Beech1900d to name just a few. Van Air operates under these standards. But please don't ask me to pull out their EASA cert docs, I just know people there, I'm not going to be your own private investigator.

@manekse I have a picture for you but I can't upload it, don't have yet 8 posts. I don't spam you all enough apparently :E just check-out OK-VAA

[menekse]

Allright, before going all drama queen on being a danger in the sky, did you know a CS-23 can be operated under regulations of a CS-25? Which many CS-23 planes in pax operations are doing, Jet31, Let, Beech1900d to name just a few. Van Air operates under these standards. But please don't ask me to pull out their EASA cert docs, I just know people there, I'm not going to be your own private investigator.

@manekse I have a picture for you but I can't upload it, don't have yet 8 posts. I don't spam you all enough apparently :E just check-out OK-VAA
Don’t miss the FMS in the picture

[OKSUP]

Lol man that's not my picture, I'm not going to ask for a detailed flight deck photo reportage...There is an EFIS and nav source FMS2 visible on the pic.
I'll send you the pic on PM, you can post it here.

But I somehow suspect that whatever I send you will not be enough for your appetite :p

Anyway guys, this has been fun, but as I said I'm done here, I have a life.
You can keep looking for all the plots you want since you seem to have all the time in the world.
Again, I'm not defending AB, Van Air or anyone, I couldn't care less. I just shared what I see and know, no more, no less. And from what I saw, from my humble position of flight crew only, there is no sign of nepotism, bribery or big chunk of Czech guys from Van Air not meeting requirements etcetc.
But, I feel that regardless of the information posted here, your minds are set on finding a smoking gun anyway. So I'm out of this thread and I wish you fun in your investigative endeavours.

[zen krempie]

Allright, before going all drama queen on being a danger in the sky, did you know a CS-23 can be operated under regulations of a CS-25? Which many CS-23 planes in pax operations are doing, Jet31, Let, Beech1900d to name just a few. Van Air operates under these standards. But please don't ask me to pull out their EASA cert docs, I just know people there, I'm not going to be your own private investigator.

@manekse I have a picture for you but I can't upload it, don't have yet 8 posts. I don't spam you all enough apparently :E just check-out OK-VAA
What’s wrong with you man?
Are you suffering some strange allergy reaction to facts?
You faulty wrote that LET410 is a CS-25 aircraft and I quoted you that LET410 is a CS-23 aircraft, which is the correct category according to EASA books. Why are you going hysterical?
I am really curious to see a picture of FMS installed in a L410

[OKSUP]

What’s wrong with you man?
Are you suffering some strange allergy reaction to facts?
You faulty wrote that LET410 is a CS-25 aircraft and I quoted you that LET410 is a CS-23 aircraft, which is the correct category according to EASA books. Why are you going hysterical?
I am really curious to see a picture of FMS installed in a L410

Sure, you guys have been screaming for a big conspiracy without any proof, but I'm the hysterical one

Well Manekse has the pic I sent him, he can post it when he has a minute

[OKSUP]

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1500x2000/img_6974_2_621b979100b0157911bacbb9f00ec7fcab7ef5cf.jpg

And yeah you're right, let's be precise. It is a cs-23 aircraft, that can be operated under the cs-25 performance requirements and standards, which is what Van Air does.

So if you really want to be picky, AB's requirement asking for experience on cs-25 is not precise enough to exclude pilots who have flown Let410 at Van Air.
I don't know about AIS and their Jet31 operations, but I do know the Jet31 can also be operated under cs-25 standards.

I have a sense this pic will not satisfy you. But that's all I have unfortunately. If you want more I encourage you to contact Van Air and AIS directly and ask for a tour of their fleets.
On this note, peace out :ok:

[zen krempie]

Sure, you guys have been screaming for a big conspiracy without any proof, but I'm the hysterical one

Well Manekse has the pic I sent him, he can post it when he has a minute
You have serious issues man, I never said anything about your company or other conspiracy theories, only an “offer” which was proposed to me years ago without referring details about which company was it.
I don’t see any FMS in the photo, just a source of a chinese aftermarket display. Don’t be shy to upload the FMS, aftermarket displays can be installed to cessnas152 too.
Is it a Universal one or the chinese display calls FMS the garmin gps?
Not sure if I don’t see a photo of the actual FMS at L410 cockpit

[menekse]

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1500x2000/img_6974_2_621b979100b0157911bacbb9f00ec7fcab7ef5cf.jpg

And yeah you're right, let's be precise. It is a cs-23 aircraft, that can be operated under the cs-25 performance requirements and standards, which is what Van Air does.

So if you really want to be picky, AB's requirement asking for experience on cs-25 is not precise enough to exclude pilots who have flown Let410 at Van Air.
I don't know about AIS and their Jet31 operations, but I do know the Jet31 can also be operated under cs-25 standards.

I have a sense this pic will not satisfy you. But that's all I have unfortunately. If you want more I encourage you to contact Van Air and AIS directly and ask for a tour of their fleets.
On this note, peace out :ok:
Where is the FMS?
I can see the electronic MFD but I can’t see any FMS. As zen said, source could be a garmin gps.
I can’t believe that anyone would install an FMS to l410, but you can prove me wrong with the picture of the FMS. That’s as easy as the pic you uploaded already

[batushka]

Guys, sorry to be rude but you're gonna have to learn how to read. I've already written that I haven't seen this "massive hiring of Czech guys" you keep talking about. I can't have an opinion about it as I've never seen it :ugh: Actually, I don't recall meeting a single Czech FO yet in the briefing room...I wish, cos I like Czech people, I spent my fair share of time in Praha :ok:

Also written just above, Van Air has Lets with EFIS, AP etcetc, so this experience can meet AB's requirements. Not sure why you keep claiming otherwise. Yes they have planes without EFIS in their fleet but that doesn't mean the pilots there don't get the experience on both. And your claim of "a middle man" at AB...lol Guys I know people from Van Air, it's a small acmi airline they don't even have a middle man for themselves! :)

I'm not defending AB here, I'm just stating what I see. And it's not what you are writing about. That's it, no more no less.
But I feel you guys are going to keep looking for something anyway, so enjoy. I'm done here
You haven’t seen “massive hiring of Czech guys”. How is it possible to know so much about Vanair but haven’t meet the pilotS from Vanair who were hired in AB
You can pm @WaylanderShade
He was posting in AB thread. He is from Prague and was saying pretty much what you said too.
After receiving a massive bukkake for his faulty posts, he changed his location from Prague to USA and went silent.
Smart move if you get caught lying.
Unlike you

[menekse]

Agree.
I feel flattered that you created an account just to post on my thread

[skyguardian88]

Minumum flight time requirements are set for safety reasons. You can have best attitude and constant smile on your face, but believe me from safety point of view without experience in airline flying you are still the same kid as the one with bad attitude. its like bodybuilding. If you have super duper motivation , you still can't compete with someone who's been lifting for years.
Even mediocre pilot with solid experience will be much safer than fresh cpl holder with the best knowledge of atpl's and airplane systems.
People at HR are kids on first time job accompanied by office pilots that couln't handle everyday flying. They think autopilot flies an airplane and in case it fails there is a captain to take over. According to them , FO is simply a rudiment required by outdated law. Why would they need to hire experienced FO that will ask for better conditions and salary when there is a kid from let410 that will lick their bottom and not complain for a few years just to be replaced by another expendabale kid after a couple of years.
Prove me wrong , but recent incident involving motivated instagram pilots almost crashing fully functional a220 in day VMC is my argument.
You are right but no need to engage a theoretical conversation at least in this thread.
It’s quite clear that people with experience on CS-23 aircraft, without FMS were hired despite the requirements. More than ten A220 are AOG in RIX cause of the sensitivity of the engines to throttle mishandling. Yes, engines are too sensitive but this type of damage could be avoided. It was just luck that the A220 you mentioned didn’t end up in Brussels city center houses. Regarding the people in HR, are not just kids. They should know at least if the experience and qualifications on CV are matching the requirements. My personal opinion is that they knew well but decided “strangely”. Same for the assessing captain.

[skyguardian88]

How can you be certain these incidents involved the FOs not meeting entry requirements? Do you work at AB? Were you part of the investigations?
Rwy excursions happen for many different reasons than just "pilots hired below published requirements". People make mistakes, all the time, regardless of their hours or previous experience. On the opposite, junior crews with little experience may display above average skills or attitude, even if they do not meet a published requirement.

I conducted my fair share of interviews in my previous career (not aviation related) and yes at times, I asked HR to send job offers to candidates who did not meet all the point of the job description. Not because they bribed me or because I knew the cousin or their godmother, but just because they showed a personality that would fit the team and make their onboarding a lot smoother and faster. A skill can be learned much faster than changing an attitude or a personality trait.

Bottom line is, hiring below a requirement that you publish on a job description is:
1) legal
2) doesn't necessarily mean there is nepotism or bribery. I'd even say these are extrem assumptions but ok...
3) as a hiring manager, you would be dumb to reject someone who displays a great attitude, just because they don't meet 100% of your published requirements. I'm of course not saying that you should disregard completely the requirements, they are here for a reason, which is to filter and give a direction to the applications you receive. But seeing the world as black or white, solely based on job requirements, would be dumb

You are not in position to ask questions mr “L410 is a CS-25 aircraft”
You are embarrassing the people who “helped” you

[menekse]

Bottom line is, hiring below a requirement that you publish on a job description is:
1) legal
2) doesn't necessarily mean there is nepotism or bribery. I'd even say these are extrem assumptions but ok...
3) as a hiring manager, you would be dumb to reject someone who displays a great attitude, just because they don't meet 100% of your published requirements. I'm of course not saying that you should disregard completely the requirements, they are here for a reason, which is to filter and give a direction to the applications you receive. But seeing the world as black or white, solely based on job requirements, would be dumb

I found an example of this on news

Student gets into Stanford after writing #BlackLivesMatter on application 100 timesBy Kayla Rodgers, CNN CNN)If you're applying to college, you can spend hours crafting the perfect admissions essay. Or you can just write the same word 100 times.

It worked for Ziad Ahmed.

The Princeton, New Jersey, high school senior was recently admitted to Stanford University after writing #BlackLivesMatter 100 times in response to the application question, "What matters to you and why?"

[BraceBrace]

...If you have super duper motivation , you still can't compete with someone who's been lifting for years...

Since when is training a competition?

I have seen 250hrs pilots in training you already could tell they would be good captains and you won't hear their names in a negative way years to follow by colleagues. And I have had feelings of "defeat" when writing reports on x-thousand hrs pilots that the level spotted still didn't reach the required standards of our company simply because their mindset didn't allow for improvement which is very unfortunate for all involved.

If you think your flighthours are your safety net, think again. Your mindset is your safety standard.

[menekse]

Since when is training a competition?

I have seen 250hrs pilots in training you already could tell they would be good captains and you won't hear their names in a negative way years to follow by colleagues. And I have had feelings of "defeat" when writing reports on x-thousand hrs pilots that the level spotted still didn't reach the required standards of our company simply because their mindset didn't allow for improvement which is very unfortunate for all involved.

If you think your flighthours are your safety net, think again. Your mindset is your safety standard.
At my experience that is very rare.
On my mind I have only one example, 4000 hrs Captain straggling to be stabilised, chewing a lot of runway each time.
He shouldn’t take his license at the first place.
His background was the usual as we discuss here. Everything payed by his mommy, first job for years in less than 10 tons aircraft in a local operator and came to our company cause was friend of our chief pilot, they are from the same town. He was trying to look friendly to everyone but with a very stupid way.
The worst “funny” complaints I received cause we had the same background ( country, air force) were for another experienced captain, not for his skills but for his attitude, especially on the ground. He was quite strict in general and he was removed from training, I think he asked it. It was super safe to fly with him. He joined another company for better money and he is doing great. The first one still licking asses and rising in company’s hierarchy.
If I would have to say a number, more than 95% of big planes experienced pilots are safe

[patituri]

Not all people living in Prague are Czechs. Including me.

Flying for AB does not give me insights into their HR and hiring policies. I just fly their planes, I don't hire pilots. I'm not going to make assumptions on something I don't know.

To my knowledge AB doesn't have more incidents than any other airline. Back to my question, do you have comparative data to support your claim? Were you involved in the investigations? If not, then you are just speculating.

The personality and attitude is something you assess during the interview of course, to see if the candidate will integrate well with your crews. If you want to be flexible on your requirements to allow meeting candidates with interesting profiles, it's up to you. Many employers are not strict on all published requirements for this exact reason. But you seem to see the world as black or white only (if I caricature, I would have guessed you come from the military without you telling us... )

Regarding your speculation that "a whole group of Czechs passed the assessment", I can only tell about my experience:
- I don't see many Czech crews in the crew briefing
- I didn't know anyone at AB when I applied
- I didn't get any shortcut, I met the requirements and had the same assessment as everyone else through my application (online test, then 2 days assessment in Riga with sim, technical interview, HR interview, psychology interview/psychometric tests, and finally management interview). There was no middle man or whatever complotist thing you mentioned in the other post...
- I certainly didn't bribe anyone ( lol, from all your assumptions, I have to admit this one made me laugh :ugh:) I can't even afford a TR, so Immagine a bribery...I also did not pay anything for my TR or LT. Just the regular bond as usual for many airlines.

I'm not sure this will satisfy your hunger for plots but please chill and stop seeing tricks everywhere. I got rejected by other airlines, with no responses, no feedback. I just forget about it and move on. Trust me life is easier like that :ok:
I think around 5 Czechs joined recently

[patituri]

Not that I want to fuel an already heated conversation but some Beechcraft 1900 pilots were also hired recently
I think this aircraft is not FMS, CS-25 either

[batushka]

Not that I want to fuel an already heated conversation but some Beechcraft 1900 pilots were also hired recently
I think this aircraft is not FMS, CS-25 either
B1900 is a CS-23 and is NOT FMS
Now waiting these pilots to try to convince us that is the opposite

[batushka]

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1500x2000/img_6974_2_621b979100b0157911bacbb9f00ec7fcab7ef5cf.jpg

And yeah you're right, let's be precise. It is a cs-23 aircraft, that can be operated under the cs-25 performance requirements and standards, which is what Van Air does.

So if you really want to be picky, AB's requirement asking for experience on cs-25 is not precise enough to exclude pilots who have flown Let410 at Van Air.
I don't know about AIS and their Jet31 operations, but I do know the Jet31 can also be operated under cs-25 standards.

I have a sense this pic will not satisfy you. But that's all I have unfortunately. If you want more I encourage you to contact Van Air and AIS directly and ask for a tour of their fleets.
On this note, peace out :ok:
OK-VAA doesn’t belong to Van air. It belongs to Trade air. Even if it was Van air aircraft, doesn’t have FMS.
Van air has OK-ASA, OK-LAZ, OK-TCA and OK-UBA, all L410
Why you didn’t upload any pic from these?
No retrofitted screens?

[menekse]

OK-VAA doesn’t belong to Van air. It belongs to Trade air. Even if it was Van air aircraft, doesn’t have FMS.
Van air has OK-ASA, OK-LAZ, OK-TCA and OK-UBA, all L410
Why you didn’t upload any pic from these?
No retrofitted screens?
I found pictures of OK-LAZ and OK-TCA on google


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1600x1079/74699_1386015748_b518a41e8eed6c7d38fe3af9cb543acb4034d2c8.jp g
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1200x675/4_14afe075949591e0943b8c6703aeb1bafbe96e03_56714564ea039f52b 0adb58a96a238d6e8a8a263_65ad7041896e96cf1a2d723c3c1116c84742 ee92.jpg

[skyguardian88]

Not that I want to fuel an already heated conversation but some Beechcraft 1900 pilots were also hired recently
I think this aircraft is not FMS, CS-25 either
Yes, as ''experienced first officers''
Though Beech1900 doesn't meet the entry requirements for CS-25, FMS aircraft
Probably they will be promoted to captains before you, funny isn't?

[batushka]

I found pictures of OK-LAZ and OK-TCA on google


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1600x1079/74699_1386015748_b518a41e8eed6c7d38fe3af9cb543acb4034d2c8.jp g
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1200x675/4_14afe075949591e0943b8c6703aeb1bafbe96e03_56714564ea039f52b 0adb58a96a238d6e8a8a263_65ad7041896e96cf1a2d723c3c1116c84742 ee92.jpg

I don’t think you will find photos of OK-ASA or OK-UBA, haven’t flown for more than 3 years.
OK-VAA never belonged to Vanair and was sold somewhere in Africa 2,5 years ago.
The only LET flying for vanair are the ones you posted the pictures

[menekse]

Yes, as ''experienced first officers''
Though Beech1900 doesn't meet the entry requirements for CS-25, FMS aircraft
Probably they will be promoted to captains before you, funny isn't?

Shame we don't have any representative here, the L410 one was quite funny

[zen krempie]

I am referring to male candidates and I would like to ask them: you are afraid of nepotism but the #femaleinaviation trend does not concern you, right? Have you ever thought that some airlines give priority to women, not because they are more competent, but because they have to follow the modern trends and occupy a certain number of positions with women? This automatically can leave you out of the process for a while and you can lose time.
You can identify as a woman, nowadays this will boost you

[zen krempie]

Since when is training a competition?

I have seen 250hrs pilots in training you already could tell they would be good captains and you won't hear their names in a negative way years to follow by colleagues. And I have had feelings of "defeat" when writing reports on x-thousand hrs pilots that the level spotted still didn't reach the required standards of our company simply because their mindset didn't allow for improvement which is very unfortunate for all involved.

If you think your flighthours are your safety net, think again. Your mindset is your safety standard.
I have seen pilots failing the TR course.
Two occasions, one with flight instructor hours and the other one with hours on a small cargo plane. I have never seen a jetliner pilot failing a TR course or stuck in LT.
HR main concern is to pick pilots that will be able to finish the training and get released in reasonable time

[batushka]

Bottom line is, hiring below a requirement that you publish on a job description is:
1) legal

Not so sure if it is legal since is a state-owned enterprise, funded by tax $$$
One way to find out.
I invite anyone who knows the details about the pilots in question to pm these details and propose a local media which will show interest in this case and make it known to the tax payers who might wonder why they have so many broken new planes cause of pilot mistakes

[BraceBrace]

I have seen pilots failing the TR course.
Two occasions, one with flight instructor hours and the other one with hours on a small cargo plane. I have never seen a jetliner pilot failing a TR course or stuck in LT.
HR main concern is to pick pilots that will be able to finish the training and get released in reasonable time

And your experience in an airline training function is...? Because I get the impression you think training is about SOPs, and learning to takeoff and land. It's not. That's simply a very basic requirement, next to other things.

There are plenty of examples I have seen. You can write books on the issues, but in general I think they all boil down to the same general reason: is someone able/willing to adapt to a new company/fleet. From a trainer point of view these are never fun experiences. Sometimes it's a capacity problem, but it can very well be an attitude problem.

[zen krempie]

And your experience in an airline training function is...? Because I get the impression you think training is about SOPs, and learning to takeoff and land. It's not. That's simply a very basic requirement, next to other things.

There are plenty of examples I have seen. You can write books on the issues, but in general I think they all boil down to the same general reason: is someone able/willing to adapt to a new company/fleet. From a trainer point of view these are never fun experiences. Sometimes it's a capacity problem, but it can very well be an attitude problem as well.
My experience in an airline training function is only acting as a safety pilot.
I have seen pilots who can't manage jetliners energy, struggling not to fall far behind the aircraft
None of them had experience in big planes previously
The two examples I mentioned, happens to know them in person
Both of them were fired during the TR course, by big airlines with quite detailed selection process including all kind of tests
At my point of view, airlines are looking for pilots who will complete the training quickly, with no failures. Pilots who fail a TR are a headache for the company
Have you ever seen a B737 pilot failing an A320 TR or taking for ever to be released as a FO?
Wizz excluded from DEC, the prop captains. In the beginning was open for everyone
Can you imagine why?

[BraceBrace]

My experience in an airline training function is only acting as a safety pilot.
...Pilots who fail a TR are a headache for the company
Have you ever seen a B737 pilot failing an A320 TR or taking for ever to be released as a FO?
Wizz excluded from DEC, the prop captains. In the beginning was open for everyone
Can you imagine why?

Safety pilot? With all respect, safety pilots are there for safety, not for training. It is not a training function.

Pilots who fail a TR are not a headache to the company. They are a possibility that requires retraining, and it happens more frequently than you think. In a training function there is usually a confidentiality clause so we don't talk about it for the EXACT reason like these forums that contain too much rumours and hearsay. Many people have opinions, but hardly have an idea of what actually happened.

[zen krempie]

Safety pilot? With all respect, safety pilots are there for safety, not for training. It is not a training function.

Pilots who fail a TR are not a headache to the company. They are a possibility that requires retraining, and it happens more frequently than you think. In a training function there is usually a confidentiality clause so we don't talk about it for the EXACT reason like these forums that contain too much rumours and hearsay. Many people have opinions, but hardly have an idea of what actually happened.
You must work for a very nice airline with humanitarian approach towards the employees.
I don't want to name, the two occasions I mentioned were ditched from big EU airlines with good reputation
I know them in person so they told me what happened, they couldn't manage the complexity and the handling of a big airliner in time given. One explained me that he was so focused on learning the systems and didn't have the time to prepare for sim flights
Airlines are after efficiency, in pilot selection that means selecting pilots for whom they won't waste more money and time that needed for the majority of the pilots.
In that aspect, is safer to have pilots that already know how to fly big jets. 0 hours on big planes pilots might manage too but chances are worse
If an airline can afford this is fine!
I am asking you again, why do you think Wizz stopped accepting prop captains for DEC positions?

[BraceBrace]

I am asking you again, why do you think Wizz stopped accepting prop captains for DEC positions?

I do work for a nice company where the "training people" prefer to keep someone in training before "exposing" him to the world of "checks". It avoids a lot of problems in the long term. But I do would like to add, a company like Ryanair, where a lot of people like to bash the company itself, actually has a very nice training philosophy as well. It takes a lot to be kicked out of Ryanair...

Training goals are different. A captain has to be able to "run the show" smoothly whatever happens. That means also in tricky conditions (meteo, operational problems,...). If the captain does not have commercial jet experience, you will find yourself spending way too much time learning the basic "technicals" of flying a commercial jet. And then training becomes pretty "heavy loaded".

As an F/O non type rated the training goals are fairly easy, and overall "technical" (application of SOPs, and learning to fly a heavy jet). It doesn't really matter what your background is, the training programs and time available are designed to go from "0" to qualified F/O. So if you have "in-house" F/O's with enough "technical" experience, it's a lot easier to upgrade those guys and force the turboprop captains to apply for right seat F/O position.

But on a personal note I will admit I don't like people with only turboprop experience to go straight to heavy widebodies on a long haul network (F/O seat) for the same reason.

I think this thread focuses too much on what some companies like to distinguish as "junior" F/O's and "senior" F/O's. If the goal is to hire "junior" F/O's, you can have 2000hrs commercial jet, you will follow a "junior" F/O training syllabus. And that hardly has anything to do with nepotism.

[menekse]

I think this thread focuses too much on what some companies like to distinguish as "junior" F/O's and "senior" F/O's. If the goal is to hire "junior" F/O's, you can have 2000hrs commercial jet, you will follow a "junior" F/O training syllabus. And that hardly has anything to do with nepotism.
I didn't open this thread to judge companies policy to have different options to join. No one posted anything against Easyjet for example which is open to applications for people who don't have a license and also for pilots with more than 500 hours on aircrafts above 10 tons
It would be criticized if they were hiring pilots with experience on aircrafts below 10 tones for direct entry F/O category as that would be contrary to the requirements. In this thread nobody criticized it, for hiring also cadets.
Pretty much the same for Ryanair and Wizzair
I opened this thread to spot all the cases where airlines are hiring below their published requirements, which has to do with nepotism or worse... As simple as that

[menekse]

Not so sure if it is legal since is a state-owned enterprise, funded by tax $$$
One way to find out.
I invite anyone who knows the details about the pilots in question to pm these details and propose a local media which will show interest in this case and make it known to the tax payers who might wonder why they have so many broken new planes cause of pilot mistakes
Brilliant!
Please share here when it goes public to the tax payers. This will clarify a lot!

[zen krempie]

But on a personal note I will admit I don't like people with only turboprop experience to go straight to heavy widebodies on a long haul network (F/O seat) for the same reason.

Till now, I thought the biggest problem with turboprop pilots was to fly short flights with jets
Everything happens to fast for them and somehow they have the idea that they can decrease speed easily while descending ending up over speed and above the path.
A direct to during the descent is a disaster
I have never flown widebody jets, that's what I see from the jump seat

[menekse]

I do work for a nice company where the "training people" prefer to keep someone in training before "exposing" him to the world of "checks". It avoids a lot of problems in the long term. But I do would like to add, a company like Ryanair, where a lot of people like to bash the company itself, actually has a very nice training philosophy as well. It takes a lot to be kicked out of Ryanair...

Training goals are different. A captain has to be able to "run the show" smoothly whatever happens. That means also in tricky conditions (meteo, operational problems,...). If the captain does not have commercial jet experience, you will find yourself spending way too much time learning the basic "technicals" of flying a commercial jet. And then training becomes pretty "heavy loaded".

As an F/O non type rated the training goals are fairly easy, and overall "technical" (application of SOPs, and learning to fly a heavy jet). It doesn't really matter what your background is, the training programs and time available are designed to go from "0" to qualified F/O. So if you have "in-house" F/O's with enough "technical" experience, it's a lot easier to upgrade those guys and force the turboprop captains to apply for right seat F/O position.

But on a personal note I will admit I don't like people with only turboprop experience to go straight to heavy widebodies on a long haul network (F/O seat) for the same reason.

I think this thread focuses too much on what some companies like to distinguish as "junior" F/O's and "senior" F/O's. If the goal is to hire "junior" F/O's, you can have 2000hrs commercial jet, you will follow a "junior" F/O training syllabus. And that hardly has anything to do with nepotism.
I took that final report from airbaltic thread.
Initial Type Rating on September 2020, when most of the already type rated pilots where sent home.
How do you explain that?

During the investigation the pilot training records were scrutinized to reveal potential gaps in the pilot training and checking process. The available information about the training process of the pilot involved in the serious incident reveals that the pilot had the Type Rating Training Course (Initial training) for the aircraft type BD-500 (A220) from September 1 till November 26, 2020. The course training records reveal some deficiencies of the pilot’s flight skills: incorrect manipulation with the sidestick, pumping of the rudder for the directional control, untimely and inadequate rudder pedals input to ensure directional control, unnecessary application of brakes, etc. In the first Latvian CAA Skill test and proficiency check after the Rating Training Course the pilot failed due to “Insufficient skills. Lack of time.” After the additional training the test was passed. In 2021, the pilot had further Flight Trainings. The Flight Training Records contain remarks of the flight instructors, namely, periodical uncertainty in command of the aircraft and crew and lack of exchange of flight information with the pilot-monitoring [FO] when flying manually. The investigation has analysed the all available (provided) information about the training process of the pilot involved in the serious incident and suggests that there are potential gaps in the company pilots’ selection, training and checking programs, as well as in the information exchange and analysis by the airline's training department. The investigation has no access to the information on how the operator collects and analyses the information gathered during the training process.
There is a possibility that the pilot with obvious deficiencies during the training and checking period was authorized for line operations without having additional training or another means of mitigation to minimize potential risks. A similar situation with incorrect pilot actions during the landing in crosswind and gusty conditions occurred on June 21, 2018 at the Riga International airport with the airBaltic aircraft A200-300, registration number YL-CSC [Final Report No 4-02/1-18(4-19)]. The FDR data of the involved aircraft showed the application of the right rudder pedal with a simultaneous increase of the left brake pedal application. The higher brake force application on the left-hand side main gear wheels caused the aircraft deviation to the left with a subsequent aircraft side skid. The investigation of this serious incident concluded, that the Root cause of the incident [21/06/2018] was related with uncoordinated asymmetric actions of the flight crew in controlling of the aircraft during the landing. Analysing the actions of the airline pilots in both situations, the investigators can assume that the repeated cause of the incidents was the improper handling of the aircraft by the crews to counteract crosswind conditions. It is likely possible that the airline pilot training program has not been updated considering possible deficiencies and the previous incident.

[patituri]

I will repeat. It's not because an airline puts out an add, there is a legal requirement from their part to LIMIT the selection process to those people. They are free to invite others as well. Is it so hard to accept the fact that they are not obliged to see you because they hired somebody else?

You talked about bribery. Not me. You talked about blame. Not me.
It was mentioned before, I will add some more details
A poster who says that he is flying for airbaltic tried to defend company's policy to hire below published entry requirements, so it's not just rumors.
You might think it's legal, but only a Latvian lawyer could answer that
AirBaltic belongs to the Ministry of Transport of the Republic of Latvia
Written requirements for employees could be consider as State Official Document
Is it legal for a manager to act differently by hiring people who don't meet the requirements for a state owned enterprise?
And what could motivate them to act like this?
It is quite technical question but I would like to hear your opinion

[menekse]

I remember another case, it wasn't nepotism but pretty much the same mentality
At the start of the COVID my company ceased operations for a period
In a desperate act, I sent my CV to an ATO that there is another topic for it, saying that I am interested to work as an FI for them
They replied that are excited and blah blah with my CV and are interested to hire me if I have the FI rating in their school
Thankfully we resumed operations and I didn't have to pay 10+k to fly piston props
Conclusion is that in some cases if you pay, you get hired.
Some do it in a legal and procedural way
Some maybe under the table
I see in other topics some people refer to nepotism and shady procedures, I encourage them to write here without spamming other threads

[twentyfivehundred220]

I remember another case, it wasn't nepotism but pretty much the same mentality
At the start of the COVID my company ceased operations for a period
In a desperate act, I sent my CV to an ATO that there is another topic for it, saying that I am interested to work as an FI for them
They replied that are excited and blah blah with my CV and are interested to hire me if I have the FI rating in their school
Thankfully we resumed operations and I didn't have to pay 10+k to fly piston props
Conclusion is that in some cases if you pay, you get hired.
Some do it in a legal and procedural way
Some maybe under the table
I see in other topics some people refer to nepotism and shady procedures, I encourage them to write here without spamming other threads


Did you have an FI rating already before applying?

[menekse]

Did you have an FI rating already before applying?
No I didn't, but that was just a formality

[menekse]

It was mentioned before, I will add some more details
A poster who says that he is flying for airbaltic tried to defend company's policy to hire below published entry requirements, so it's not just rumors.
You might think it's legal, but only a Latvian lawyer could answer that
AirBaltic belongs to the Ministry of Transport of the Republic of Latvia
Written requirements for employees could be consider as State Official Document
Is it legal for a manager to act differently by hiring people who don't meet the requirements for a state owned enterprise?
And what could motivate them to act like this?
It is quite technical question but I would like to hear your opinion
Don't expect any reply
Rarely theories survive contact with facts
I have seen that in any forum.
I don't write only in ppune, I have plenty of time in the desert (on tinder you can find only pros)
In every subject you can find some people talk like gurus but when you present them facts, they disappear